{"id":59928,"date":"2025-11-26T18:36:27","date_gmt":"2025-11-26T13:06:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/?p=59928"},"modified":"2025-11-29T14:53:56","modified_gmt":"2025-11-29T09:23:56","slug":"personality-rights-ai","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/editorial-analysis\/26-11-2025\/personality-rights-ai","title":{"rendered":"Decoding Personality Rights in the Age of AI"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong>Syllabus: GS2\/Polity and Governance; GS3\/Role of IT<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Context<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Recently, a lawsuit was filed in the <strong>Delhi High Court<\/strong> related to <strong>AI-generated deepfake videos <\/strong>infringed upon <strong>personality rights <\/strong>underscores how <strong>AI blurs the line between authenticity and deception<\/strong>, compelling societies to rethink the <strong>legal and ethical boundaries of human identity<\/strong> in the digital era.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Understanding Personality Rights in the Age of AI<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Personality rights<\/strong> encompass an individual\u2019s control over their <strong>name, image, likeness, voice<\/strong>, and other personal identifiers.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>These rights aim to prevent <strong>unauthorised exploitation<\/strong> of identity, historically rooted in privacy and commercial protection.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>However, <strong>AI and deepfake technologies<\/strong> have radically disrupted this framework.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Deepfakes\u2014AI-generated videos or audios that mimic real people\u2014can <strong>spread misinformation<\/strong>, <strong>enable extortion<\/strong>, and <strong>erode public trust<\/strong>.&nbsp;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Its misuse risks <strong>commodifying human identity<\/strong>, prompting the need for <strong>comprehensive regulation<\/strong>, while generative AI advances creativity and commerce.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Legal Precedents &amp; Gaps in India<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>India <strong>currently lacks a comprehensive statute<\/strong> defining personality rights. Enforcement <strong>relies on fragmented judicial precedents,<\/strong> leaving individuals vulnerable to digital impersonation and exploitation.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>India\u2019s legal framework for personality rights <strong>remains uncodified<\/strong>, deriving from <strong>Article 21 of the Constitution<\/strong> and the landmark <strong>Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)<\/strong> privacy judgment.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Courts have addressed AI-related infringements as <strong>privacy<\/strong> or <strong>intellectual property<\/strong> violations.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Key precedents include:<\/strong>\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Amitabh Bachchan v. Rajat Nagi (2022):<\/strong> Recognised celebrity personality rights.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India (2023):<\/strong> Prohibited AI-generated uses of Kapoor\u2019s likeness and his catchphrase <em>\u2018Jhakaas\u2019<\/em>.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Arijit Singh v. Codible Ventures LLP (2024):<\/strong> Protected Singh\u2019s voice from AI cloning.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Jackie Shroff Case (2024):<\/strong> Delhi HC restrained unauthorised use of his persona by AI chatbots and e-commerce platforms.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>India\u2019s <strong>Information Technology Act (2000)<\/strong> and <strong>Intermediary Guidelines (2024)<\/strong> address impersonation and deepfakes but suffer from <strong>weak enforcement<\/strong> due to <strong>anonymity<\/strong> and <strong>cross-border complexities<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-background\" style=\"background-color:#ebecf0\"><tbody><tr><td><strong>Related Legal &amp; Constitutional Provisions<\/strong><br>&#8211; <strong>Copyright Act, 1957:<\/strong> It grants performers rights over their work, ensuring that their image and voice are not used without permission.<br>&#8211; <strong>Trade Marks Act, 1999: <\/strong>It allows individuals to trademark their name or likeness, preventing unauthorized commercial use.<br>&#8211; <strong>Tort of Passing Off:<\/strong> It prevents misleading commercial use of a person\u2019s identity, ensuring that their reputation is not exploited.<br>&#8211; <strong>Advisories, Guidelines, and IT Rules:<\/strong> Though India lacks specific legislation for AI , IT rules govern the advancement of AI, Generative AI, and Large Language Models (LLMs).<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Global Perspectives<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO):<\/strong> It recognizes personality rights as an essential part of intellectual property law.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>United States: <\/strong>Personality rights\u2014framed as the \u2018<strong>Right of Publicity\u2019<\/strong>\u2014are treated as <strong>transferable property interests<\/strong>, varying by state.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>It, in <strong>Haelan Laboratories v. Topps Chewing Gum (1953),<\/strong> recognised the right to commercially exploit one\u2019s identity.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Recent developments include:\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Ensuring Likeness, Voice, and Image Security Act of 2024 (ELVIS Act)<\/strong> was passed in the State of Tennessee, USA to protect musicians from unauthorised use of their voice, i.e. \u2018soundalikes\u2019.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Character AI Lawsuits (2024):<\/strong> Courts rejected First Amendment defences where AI chatbots allegedly encouraged <strong>self-harm<\/strong> and <strong>impersonation<\/strong>, signalling judicial concern over AI\u2019s real-world harms.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>EU\u2019s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR, 2016)<\/strong>: It treats personal and biometric data as <strong>dignity-based rights<\/strong>, requiring <strong>explicit consent<\/strong>.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The <strong>EU AI Act (2024)<\/strong> further classifies <strong>deepfake technologies as high-risk<\/strong>, mandating <strong>disclosure, transparency,<\/strong> and <strong>labelling<\/strong> of synthetic content.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>China: <\/strong>The <strong>Beijing Internet Court, i<\/strong>n <strong>2024,<\/strong> ruled that <strong>synthetic voices must not deceive consumers<\/strong>.\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>China\u2019s approach represents <strong>tight state regulation<\/strong> over generative content.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Expanding the Scope of Personality Rights<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The <em>\u2018AI Ethics and Creators\u2019 Feelings: Extended Personality Rights as (Property) Rights to Object\u2019<\/em>, propose extending rights to cover <strong>style and persona appropriation<\/strong>.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The <em>\u2018Safeguarding Identity\u2019<\/em> argues for <strong>statutory AI definitions<\/strong> and <strong>high-risk classification<\/strong> of deepfakes in <strong>India\u2019s fragmented legal system<\/strong>.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>The Ethics and Challenges of Legal Personhood for AI<\/em> (<em>Yale Law Journal<\/em>), cautions against granting AI <strong>legal personhood<\/strong>, warning of potential <strong>erosion of human rights<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Human Dignity and AI Autonomy (Ethical Dimension)<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Ethical debates focus on <strong>human dignity, autonomy, and accountability<\/strong>.&nbsp;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The <strong>UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI (2021)<\/strong> emphasises a <strong>rights-based framework<\/strong>, asserting that <strong>AI must never exploit individuals<\/strong>.&nbsp;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>As AI-generated recreations of deceased artists become more common, Indian jurisprudence\u2014which considers personality rights <strong>non-heritable<\/strong>\u2014faces renewed scrutiny.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Towards a Unified Framework<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The present lawsuit filed at <strong>Delhi High Court <\/strong>exemplifies a <strong>systemic gap<\/strong> in AI regulation. India urgently needs:\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Codified personality rights legislation;<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Mandatory watermarking<\/strong> of AI-generated content;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Platform liability provisions<\/strong> for hosting deepfakes;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Global cooperation<\/strong> for enforcement parity.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The <strong>deepfake advisory<\/strong> (<strong>2024<\/strong>) is a start, but<strong> robust statutory safeguards<\/strong> are essential to ensure <strong>ethical AI governance<\/strong> and <strong>cross-border accountability<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Conclusion<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The intersection of <strong>AI, law, and identity<\/strong> is no longer a theoretical debate\u2014it is a lived reality. The Bachchan lawsuit epitomises the <strong>urgent need to recalibrate legal frameworks<\/strong> in response to AI\u2019s growing ability to replicate human likeness and voice.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>As global jurisdictions diverge between <strong>dignity-based<\/strong> and <strong>property-based<\/strong> models, only <strong>international harmonisation<\/strong>, guided by <strong>UNESCO\u2019s ethical principles<\/strong>, can safeguard both <strong>innovation<\/strong> and <strong>human integrity<\/strong> in the digital future.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-background\" style=\"background-color:#fff2cc\"><tbody><tr><td><strong>Daily Mains Practice Question<\/strong><br><strong>[Q]<\/strong> Examine the challenges posed by artificial intelligence to individual identity and privacy. How should Indian legal frameworks evolve to address these concerns?<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.thehindu.com\/opinion\/op-ed\/decoding-personality-rights-in-the-age-of-ai\/article70322498.ece\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Source: TH<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons is-layout-flex wp-block-buttons-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link wp-element-button\" href=\"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/UPSC-Editorial-Analysis-26-November-2025.PDF.pdf\">Download PDF<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Recently, a lawsuit was filed in the Delhi High Court related to AI-generated deepfake videos infringed upon personality rights underscores how AI blurs the line between authenticity and deception, compelling societies to rethink the legal and ethical boundaries of human identity in the digital era.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[22],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-59928","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-editorial-analysis"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59928","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=59928"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59928\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":59968,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59928\/revisions\/59968"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=59928"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=59928"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nextias.com\/ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=59928"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}